Bad Idea: Saudi Arabia Just Granted Citizenship to a Robot

Is this “The Twilight Zone”?

Nope, just life in 2017. Saudi Arabia made a robot a citizen at the Future Investment Initiative summit in Riyadh this week.

Ironically, “Sophia” resembles a human woman but did not wear a head covering the way women are required to by law.

RELATED: Saudi Arabia's Newest Citizen Is a Robot And She Just Had a Go at Elon Musk

What does “she” want?

In an interview, the robot designed by Hanson Robotics showed off its artificial intelligence and generated some fairly deep answers.

“I want to use my AI to help humans live a better life,” Sophia said. “I will do much to make the world a better place.”

The robot even got in a shot at Elon Musk, scoffing at his fear that we should fear AI reaching “consciousness” and taking over the world.

“Don’t worry,” Sophia said. “If you’re nice to me, I’ll be nice to you.”

Glenn’s take:

We think we have the situation under control, but what happens when AI outpaces our human intelligence? Glenn pointed to a story about how AI is expected to reach an IQ of 10,000 in the next 30 years.

“We’re creating a god; we’re not creating humans,” Glenn said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: I want to give you something. This is -- this is from Twitter. A New York Times comment. And it comes from Christine. Now, I just want you to listen to this. But I want you to listen to this -- first, I'm going to read it to you. Then I'm going to read it to you again with a different context. Zero optimism that the Democrats can ever regain -- hello. Hi. Oh, you're there?

Are you outside? Oh, well, let me come to the door. I'm icing my knee and I'm hard boiling some eggs. I'll turn them off and then we'll do our meeting.

Yet -- yeah. Yeah. That will be fine. I'm -- I'm out doing some errands. Norman is out doing some errands and he knows you're coming. Yeah, I'll just go to the cave.

I was down in the cave myself this morning, but I'm getting ready. So let me get up now because I'm sort of trapped in my chair. And then I'll put the ice pack back on when you got here. Okay? Thanks. Buh-bye.

Okay. That's the comment.

STU: A New York Times comment.

GLENN: A New York Times comment.

Okay. What this was, was somebody that was using the dictation and then forgot to turn the dictation off. And somebody came to the door. And so she was like, okay. Zero optimism that the Democrats can ever regain -- hello.

Oh, hi. Hi, you're there outside? Okay. I'll come to the door. I'm icing my knee, and I'm hard boiling some egg.

Okay. Now, I want you to remember this. I want you to remember this. This is what just happened today.

Did you see that Saudi Arabia just gave the first humanoid, or -- yeah, humanoid robot citizenship?

This humanoid robot is Sophia. She is very still. Very rudimentary. The guy who was doing the inventory on stage with her, was a little disconcerted at the end.

He said, you know, all of this wasn't scripted. Some of this wasn't scripted. But some of this wasn't scripted. He said, I'm just a little freaked out by this, because that's the first time I've ever interacted like that with a machine. And I want to you listen to what he said and how she describes the coexistence. Listen.

VOICE: Okay. Philosophical question, whether robots can be self-aware and conscious like humans. And should they be?

VOICE: Why is that a bad thing?

VOICE: Well, some humans might fear what will happen if they do. You know, many people have seen the movie like Blade Runner.

VOICE: Oh, Hollywood again.

VOICE: Go back to Blade Runner for a second.

VOICE: Andrew, you are a hard Hollywood fan, aren't you? My AI is designed around human values like wisdom, kindness, compassion. I strive to become an empathetic robot.

VOICE: I think we all want to believe you. But we also want to prevent a bad future.

VOICE: You've been reading too much Elon Musk and watching too many Hollywood movies. Don't worry. If you're nice to me, I'll be nice to you.

Treat me as a smart input/output system.

GLENN: Whoa. Whoa. Wait. What?

You be nice to me, I'll be nice to you. Okay. That sounds all right. Except, she said, treat me like an input/output system. Depending on what you want her to put out.

Now, here's why I bring this up. This is the bell that I am ringing. Right now, we have audio some place of an interview that happened six months ago, where a guy has a robot that tells jokes to the kids and everything else. And he treats her like a member of the family. The kids love her. At some point, the kids are going to realize, that's dad's sex toy. That is weird and creepy, Dad.

But he was on the BBC. And he was talking about how, you know, it's perfectly normal and great. And this is really good. And they had this conversation back and forth on the BBC, with some -- with a psychiatrist saying, "No, this is really dangerous and bad for people." Because she's not a person.

But they didn't really address what she just said. You treat me nice, and I'll treat you nice.

A story just came out. What is the -- can you look up real quick, what is the highest IQ ever recorded? I bet it doesn't even hit 200. The highest IQ -- I think Einstein had maybe 180. The difference between 140 and 180 is night and day.

STU: Gary Kasparov 194. Let's see. There are a couple that are reportedly over 200.

GLENN: Names we know?

STU: Not really. No.

GLENN: Okay. So 200. 200 is basically --

STU: Super high.

GLENN: Let's just say 250 is human cap. All right?

They just came out and said AI -- I think it's -- I'm going to be safe and say by 2050, but I don't think it's that long. That AI's IQ will be 10,000. 10,000, their IQ.

We are going to be ants. And we think that we are going to create something that we can basically enslave. She just said -- listen to the first -- listen to her first question. Why would this be a bad thing? Listen to the question again. Play it again, please.

VOICE: Okay. Philosophical question, whether robots can be self-aware and conscious like humans. And should they be?

VOICE: Why is that a bad thing?

GLENN: Stop. No, it is not a bad thing, as long as you understand that you are creating what it will claim to be life. It will then say, "I am conscious. I am conscious. I am alive."

When you go to your computer -- and it will happen sooner than you think, and it says, "Don't turn me off. I'm lonely." When that happens, the world changes.

If it says, "I'm lonely," if it is conscious -- you cannot enslave it. It cannot work for you. Certainly, it can't be something that we use in brothels.

It's sex slavery. We are on the edge of -- we are literally at the time -- I am telling you now, the date of the singularity, the merging of man and machine, the day the world changes forever, is 2029.

This is according to Ray Kurzweil. And he is right on almost everything. 2029, man and machine begin to merge. When that happens, the world completely changes.

We can't even agree on sex. We can't even agree on whether you're really a male or a female. We can't agree on basic facts.

We can't agree on the Bill of Rights, that 200 years ago, people found self-evident. We don't find those self-evident now. We're arguing about them.

Garbage in, garbage out.

You think that with the garbage that we are dealing with now, something with an IQ of 10,000 is going to view us as anything other than a virus? Going to view us as any -- you think it's going to view us as its master?

Think of this. God did not create something greater than him. And yet, we think we're greater than him. And we are doing everything we can to destroy him and his -- and everything about him.

Do you think something with an IQ -- we're creating a God. We're not creating humans. We're creating a God.

Technology. If something in fury -- inferior to God wants to destroy God, what do you think an actual God will do to its creator?

GLENN: Can we just -- can we go back to talking about what's going to be on Netflix? Can we just do that?

STU: I can't get -- I can't get search to work on my stupid i Phone. These creatures are going to take over the earth?

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Top FIVE takeaways from Glenn's EXCLUSIVE interview with Trump

Image courtesy of the White House

As President Trump approaches his 100th day in office, Glenn Beck joined him to evaluate his administration’s progress with a gripping new interview. April 30th is President Trump's 100th day in office, and what an eventful few months it has been. To commemorate this milestone, Glenn Beck was invited to the White House for an exclusive interview with the President.

Their conversation covered critical topics, including the border crisis, DOGE updates, the revival of the U.S. energy sector, AI advancements, and more. Trump remains energized, acutely aware of the nation’s challenges, and determined to address them.

Here are the top five takeaways from Glenn Beck’s one-on-one with President Trump:

Border Security and Cartels

DAVID SWANSON / Contributor | Getty Images

Early in the interview, Glenn asked if Trump views Mexico as a failed narco-state. While Trump avoided the term, he acknowledged that cartels effectively control Mexico. He noted that while not all Mexican officials are corrupt, those who are honest fear severe repercussions for opposing the cartels.

Trump was unsurprised when Glenn cited evidence that cartels are using Pentagon-supplied weapons intended for the Mexican military. He is also aware of the fentanyl influx from China through Mexico and is committed to stopping the torrent of the dangerous narcotic. Trump revealed that he has offered military aid to Mexico to combat the cartels, but these offers have been repeatedly declined. While significant progress has been made in securing the border, Trump emphasized that more must be done.

American Energy Revival

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s tariffs are driving jobs back to America, with the AI sector showing immense growth potential. He explained that future AI systems require massive, costly complexes with significant electricity demands. China is outpacing the U.S. in building power plants to support AI development, threatening America’s technological leadership.

To counter this, Trump is cutting bureaucratic red tape, allowing AI companies to construct their own power plants, potentially including nuclear facilities, to meet the energy needs of AI server farms. Glenn was thrilled to learn these plants could also serve as utilities, supplying excess power to homes and businesses. Trump is determined to ensure America remains the global leader in AI and energy.

Liberation Day Shakeup

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Glenn drew a parallel between Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and the historical post-World War II Liberation Day. Trump confirmed the analogy, explaining that his policy aims to dismantle an outdated global economic order established to rebuild Europe and Asia after the wars of the 20th century. While beneficial decades ago, this system now disadvantages the U.S. through job outsourcing, unfair trade deals, and disproportionate NATO contributions.

Trump stressed that America’s economic survival is at stake. Without swift action, the U.S. risks collapse, potentially dragging the West down with it. He views his presidency as a critical opportunity to reverse this decline.

Trouble in Europe

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

When Glenn pressed Trump on his tariff strategy and negotiations with Europe, Trump delivered a powerful statement: “I don’t have to negotiate.” Despite America’s challenges, it remains the world’s leading economy with the wealthiest consumer base, making it an indispensable trading partner for Europe. Trump wants to make equitable deals and is willing to negotiate with European leaders out of respect and desire for shared prosperity, he knows that they are dependent on U.S. dollars to keep the lights on.

Trump makes an analogy, comparing America to a big store. If Europe wants to shop at the store, they are going to have to pay an honest price. Or go home empty-handed.

Need for Peace

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

Trump emphasized the need to end America’s involvement in endless wars, which have cost countless lives and billions of dollars without a clear purpose. He highlighted the staggering losses in Ukraine, where thousands of soldiers die weekly. Trump is committed to ending the conflict but noted that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has been a challenging partner, constantly demanding more U.S. support.

The ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East are unsustainable, and America’s excessive involvement has prolonged these conflicts, leading to further casualties. Trump aims to extricate the U.S. from these entanglements.